Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The Vale syntax checker should not set the PR in error #464

Closed
jeromecambon opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 9 comments
Closed

The Vale syntax checker should not set the PR in error #464

jeromecambon opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 9 comments

Comments

@jeromecambon
Copy link
Contributor

jeromecambon commented Nov 7, 2022

Currently, the Vale syntax checker we have enabled on the bonita-doc repository set the PR in error as soon as a Vale warning appears.
See this PR for instance.

@jeromecambon
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeromecambon commented Nov 7, 2022

This is related to an issue in the Vale action that makes the workflow to fail.
This is also not possible to set the reviewdog 'level' parameter, that would allow to set the error level.
Moreover, it seems it is not possible to force a workflow to have an exit code different of 'failure' (see https://docs.github.com/en/actions/creating-actions/setting-exit-codes-for-actions)

@jeromecambon jeromecambon self-assigned this Nov 7, 2022
@tbouffard
Copy link
Member

tbouffard commented Nov 7, 2022

Moreover, it seems it is not possible to force a workflow to have an exit code different of 'failure' (see docs.github.com/en/actions/creating-actions/setting-exit-codes-for-actions)

This link is about setting an action exit code, not the workflow exit code. What we would like is to set the workflow global status to neutral or something similar. This may not possible for now as well.
See also https://docs.github.com/en/rest/checks/runs#create-a-check-run

@tbouffard
Copy link
Member

ℹ️ Vale is disable in bonita-doc until we found a solution: bonitasoft/bonita-doc#2218

@jeromecambon
Copy link
Contributor Author

Still an issue that make reviewdo to fail, when we have big files with many errors/warnings:

Error: reviewdog: Too many results (annotations) in diff.
  You may miss some annotations due to GitHub limitation for annotation created by logging command.
  Please check GitHub Actions log console to see all results.
  
  Limitation:
  - 10 warning annotations and 10 error annotations per step
  - 50 annotations per job (sum of annotations from all the steps)
  - 50 annotations per run (separate from the job annotations, these annotations aren't created by users)

@jeromecambon
Copy link
Contributor Author

Created an issue for Vale about this:
errata-ai/vale-action#89

@jeromecambon
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeromecambon commented Nov 25, 2022

I made a fix in the Vale action, and wanted to create a PR, but don't have (yet) the rights to do it.

@tbouffard
Copy link
Member

tbouffard commented Nov 25, 2022

@jeromecambon to create the PR, you must first fork the vale-action repository, push your changes to this fork and then you will be able to create a PR targeting the vale-action repo from your fork.
See https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/about-forks

@jeromecambon
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeromecambon commented May 12, 2023

The issue errata-ai/vale-action#84 is not fixed for a while, so we can close this issue, since Vale has been disabled.
We are going to remove the configuration from the bonita-doc repository: bonitasoft/bonita-doc#2389
This is the sole repository that includes Vale configuration (see #499).

@jeromecambon
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeromecambon commented May 12, 2023

Setting the right close reason.

@jeromecambon jeromecambon closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale May 12, 2023
jeromecambon added a commit to bonitasoft/bonita-doc that referenced this issue May 12, 2023
Vale syntax checker issue is not fixed for a while, so we need to
cleanup Vale-related info.
See bonitasoft/bonita-documentation-site#464
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants